Money as art

Nearly all of us – nearly all of us who live in the United States, at least – have spent all our lives looking at the same style of paper currency: those things that say “Federal Reserve Note” and have a dead President in the center of the bill in an oval frame. Now that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing has begun distributing a new design of U.S. currency, we’ve started seeing some variations in the theme; certainly we get to see the details of the portrait engravers’ work much more clearly. Still, though, we rarely stop to appreciate the skill and artistry of the engravers… after all, it’s just money. We just take it out and spend it.

But what if the Bureau of Engraving and Printing decided, as they did in the 1890s, to use our paper money as a showcase for art?

The 1896 results were — and could be — beautiful. Such as one of the first examples, this dollar bill.

Will H. Low’s design for the $1 note, entitled History Instructing Youth, shows a female History with a young student standing beside her, gesturing to an open book of history before her. An olive branch rests against the book, holding it open to show the Constitution of the United States upon the page. Both the Washington Memorial and the Capitol Dome can be seen in the background landscape. The outside border of the note shows 23 wreaths, each bearing the name of a noteworthy American – not surprisingly starting with Washington, Jefferson and Franklin, but also including such names as poet Henry Longfellow, inventor Robert Fulton, and author Nathaniel Hawthorne, among many others. The seal of the Treasury appears in the lower right.

Though you can’t tell it from the picture, the Constitution has a clearly readable Preamble and initial article text.

Many other even more gorgeous “money as art” examples are shown on the page.

While money design can be controversial today, it wasn’t much easier in 1896. Take for example the controversy over Walter Shirlaw’s design for the $5 bill.

Though most people were impressed with what the Times called the bill’s “beautiful and imposing” design, however, Anthony Comstock was not. Comstock, a religious fundamentalist and founder of the Watch and Ward Society, found the use of feminine nudity on the nation’s currency to be appalling and loathesome. The Society therefore actively campaigned for the recalling of all the bills. To appease this radical group, the BEP made plans to install more clothing on the figures for the 1897 issue of the note.

It’s of interest, perhaps, to note that the U.S. Mint has also faced difficulties with the Watch and Ward Society. The “Standing Liberty” quarter of 1916, pictured at left, raised the Society’s objections to Liberty’s partially-uncovered breast, and because of their opinionated influence the coin was redesigned soon later.

The money-as-art movement was doomed, alas. Banks objected that the denominations were not clear enough. And the Treasury Secretary who led the cause, J. G. Carlisle, resigned for political reasons; his 1897 successor had more of an eye for designs that were “simple, clear and straightforward” and scrapped the whole line of bills.

It’s a shame that the goal of today’s money is to be counterfeit-proof, rather than pleasant to the eye. One (small) reason, perhaps, folks prefer to use plastic.

(via BoingBoing)